Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quad vs dual core

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Quad vs dual core

    That's the eternal question for gamers.

    Well run this everybody -and Torlan as a map.

    http://hocbench.com/ut3.php

    Torlan seems to stress my graphics card well. If you have any artefacts, graphics corruption, then the rseult doesn't count.

    Post the output of 1280x1024, and 1440x900, 1680x1050 if your monitor goes that far.
    NB Confirm actual CPU speed and state any graphics card overclocking, or state it's a stock system.

    And give us the results. Then we'll know what card\core setup is best.
    Also tell us if your graphics card is overclocked and if so how much.

    I reckon the quads will win. Since I have a high end PC I won't post. This isn't a competition for highest= best, it's to get baseline values so that people will know how best to upgrade.

    (With thanks to Zofo for having the original idea and showing me this app.)

    Results....

    Rhi
    Quad q9450 2.7 ghz, XP, 2x2gb@333
    8800gt stock 512mb
    1280 - 128 1440 - n\a 1680 -n\a

    valis
    Quad e5430 2.66 ghz, XP, 4x2GB@333
    8800gt stock 512mb
    1280 - 120 1440 - n\a 1680 -n\a

    Regidawg
    quad q6600 3.6ghz, xp, 2x1gb@?
    GPU - 8800gt (assumed as stock)
    1280 - n\a 1440 - n\a 1680 -n\a
    1024x768 - 148

    #2
    Only the top quads (as in the Core2Quad Extreme) is the way to go, mainly because all of the other C2Q's have slow clock speeds and not as much cache. The newer C2D's (8400 & 8500) perform extremely well and are probably the best value for money CPU's available at the moment. The new C2Q's don't offer much above the previous range and the old Q6600 isn't really worth the money nowadays.

    If you got the cash, go extreme (QX9770), if you don't, get an Intel 8500 as it will overclock to 4GHz on air cooling with a decent mobo/RAM setup and will decimate the Q6600.

    Graphics cards are up in the air at the moment. The 9800GX2 is fast and expensive (although cheaper than the 768MB 8800Ultra when they first came out). The new 9800GTX apparently doesn't offer much more than a 512MB 8800GTS, which for the time being seems to be best value for money card at the moment. They are coming down in price (~£150) and they should last longer than the (older but still very good) 512MB 8800GT.

    For anyone wondering why I haven't mentioned the AMD/ATI:

    The ATI 3800 X2 seemed like a great card when it was announced. Hopefully people now know the truth about the it when it comes to higher resolutions and adding AA & AF. AMD's top of the range Phenom was pwned hard by the Q6600 which is now a bad investment in itself.

    Comment


      #3
      I don't want a discussion thread. Let's just find the answers. Let's see the impact of caches, 45nm artchitecure and all of that. There's only one way to know - getting loads of results.

      Comment


        #4
        If you're not going to OC a Q6600, a good dual core is the way to go, because most games dont take advantage of more than 2 cores..

        Comment


          #5
          Starter for 10

          System Information
          Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
          System memory: 2.0 GB
          CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
          CPU speed: 2700 MHz
          Sound system: SB X-Fi Audio [BF00]
          VGA Information
          Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
          Memory: 512.0 MB
          Driver version: 6.14.0011.6921 (English)
          Benchmark Information
          Demo: Torlan
          Quality: High Quality
          Anisotropic filtering: 16×

          Resolution: 1280×1024
          Score = 128 FPS
          Score = 128 FPS
          Average score = 128 FPS

          So if somebody wants to run a dual core and a 8800gt, stock, at 2700 mhz to find out if the above posters are right (I don't particularly want oppinions.....)

          Comment


            #6
            when i get my e8400 build up and running ill see if i can post some benchmarks

            Comment


              #7
              System Information
              Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
              System memory: 2.0 GB
              CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40GHz
              CPU speed: 3600 MHz
              Sound system: SB X-Fi Audio [8C00]
              VGA Information
              Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
              Memory: 512.0 MB
              Driver version: 6.14.0011.6921 (English)
              Comment: 4144
              Benchmark Information
              Demo: Torlan
              Quality: High Quality
              Anisotropic filtering: 16×
              Comment: 4144

              Resolution: 1024×768
              Score = 148 FPS


              System Information
              Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
              System memory: 2.0 GB
              CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40GHz
              CPU speed: 3600 MHz
              Sound system: SB X-Fi Audio [8C00]
              VGA Information
              Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
              Memory: 512.0 MB
              Driver version: 6.14.0011.6921 (English)
              Comment: torlan pt.2
              Benchmark Information
              Demo: Torlan
              Quality: High Quality
              Anisotropic filtering: 16×
              Comment: torlan pt.2

              Resolution: 1280×1024
              Score = 138 FPS
              Score = 137 FPS
              Average score = 137 FP

              I never overclocked my video cards.

              Comment


                #8
                System Information
                Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
                System memory: 2.0 GB
                CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40GHz
                CPU speed: 3600 MHz
                Sound system: SB X-Fi Audio [8C00]
                VGA Information
                Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
                Memory: 512.0 MB
                Driver version: 6.14.0011.6921 (English)
                Comment: 4144
                Benchmark Information
                Demo: CarbonFire
                Quality: High Quality
                Anisotropic filtering: 16×
                Comment: 4144

                Resolution: 1024×768
                Score = 182 FPS
                Score = 188 FPS
                Average score = 185 FPS

                Resolution: 1280×1024
                Score = 164 FPS
                Score = 162 FPS
                Average score = 163 FPS

                Comment


                  #9
                  the benchmark read my cpu speed wrong I'm overclocked at 3.2ghz not 3.6ghz (i set my cpu's multiplier down to 8)bench mark must have picked it up at 9.

                  planned upgrades with in the next month.
                  a second 8800gt (i love this card)
                  q9450 overclock it to 3.6ghz easy
                  and another 2GB of memory

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Interesting. So the CPU is as important as the GPU even at low res.

                    Do you have Torlan benches at 1280x1024, and is the GPU overclocked? (the second post is carbonfire)

                    Comment


                      #11
                      E6400 somewhat OC'd with the G80 8800GTS 640, ill post the results later today, just wanted to save a spot on the first page ^^

                      Edit:
                      The benchmark started at 2008-04-27 19:35:10

                      System Information
                      Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
                      System memory: 4,0 GB
                      CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6400 @ 2.13GHz
                      CPU speed: 3000 MHz
                      Sound system: SoundMAX HD Audio
                      VGA Information
                      Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS
                      Memory: 640.0 MB
                      Driver version: 6.14.0011.7474 (English)

                      Resolution: 1280×1024
                      Score = 93 FPS

                      Resolution: 1600×1200
                      Score = 68 FPS

                      Full details and AF 16
                      -tJev

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I think at lower resolutions games tend to be more cpu bound in general anyway because they are having to shuffle data to the cards that much faster. It is interesting to see cpu have that much of an impact though, I've got the same card.

                        One thing though, the app only reports one of my quadcores, I've got 2 (8 in total). I'm running a Xeon chipset/motherboard and it skews the results a bit, as it really needs to be running 1600mhz fsb/800mhz ram to overcome the latency issues you get with fb-dimms (voltage buffered ddr2). If you compare my score against rhiridflaidd's (which seems to be a comparable single slot/quad setup to mine), you'll see the impact that the latency of fb-dimms has on performance in general. At 1600mhz fsb this is mitigated on the current 5400 chipsets, but I chose 1333's for now to save 2 grand so...

                        System Information
                        Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP
                        System memory: 2.0 GB
                        CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5430 @ 2.66GHz
                        CPU speed: 2666 MHz
                        Sound system: Realtek HD Audio output
                        VGA Information
                        Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
                        Memory: 512.0 MB
                        Driver version: 6.14.0011.7474 (English)
                        Benchmark Information
                        Demo: Torlan
                        Quality: High Quality
                        Anisotropic filtering: 16

                        Resolution: 12801024
                        Score = 120 FPS


                        Also this benchmark app seems to be reporting only 2.0Gb ram from what I see here, which makes me wonder how it's spawning Dxdiag (which I saw it do to check system specs). Dxdiag itself reports 3Gb here, which is all that Xp32 'sees' on my system (8Gb total in Xp64/Vista64 etc). I use Xp32 still for gaming.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          My abit's FSB defaults to 340. It would be interesting to see how a xeon, 45nm quad and a q6600 all do at the same base FSB and multiplier.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Something I forgot to mention, these .45 harpertown Xeons have 12Mb cache to help mitigate the fb-dimm latency issues. In any case Xeons have never been for gaming, though things are getting better as games go multicore, and Nehalem should further reduce the performance penalty for workstation motherboards in games.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Will check when I come home.. If I remember..

                              Edit: 400 posts :O

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X